When phone is powered on, never keep phone next to your body, especially during a phone call.

When communicating, use phone in speaker mode or a wired earpiece. Only make calls when signal is strong (4-5 bars).

February 28, 2018According to test reports filed with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) for the Galaxy S9 for cellular transmission is 0.34 watts per kilogram (W/kg) at the head, and 0.93 W/kg when worn on the body. The WiFi hotspot SAR is 0.75 w/kg. The SAR for simultaneous transmission (cellular plus Wi-Fi) is 1.25 W/kg at the head, 1.39 W/kg when worn on the body, and 1.52 W/kg when used as a hotspot. (1)

For the Galaxy S9 Plus, the SAR for cellular transmission is <0.10 W/kg at the head, and 0.47 W/kg when worn on the body. The WiFi hotspot SAR is 0.18 W/kg. The SAR for simultaneous transmission (cellular plus Wi-Fi) is 1.14 W/kg at the head, 1.42 W/kg when worn on the body, and 1.59 W/kg when used as a hotspot. (2)

All SARs reported above are averaged over one gram of body tissue corresponding to the U.S. standard. The SARs may vary depending upon your specific cell phone carrier.

The minimum separation distance for body-worn testing was 15 mm (about 0.6 of an inch). According to the testing facility, "Device was tested using a fixed spacing for body-worn accessory testing. A separation distance of 15 mmwas considered because the manufacturer has determined that there will be body-worn accessories
available in the marketplace for users to support this separation distance." (1,2)

The SARs for the Apple iPhone X and iPhone X Plus were obtained at a separation distance of 5 mm (about 0.2 of an inch) from the body so the body-worn SAR values are not comparable to those reported for the Samsung phones. The iPhone SAR values can be found in my article on Apple Iphones.

The FCC ID numbers for the Galaxy S9 are A3L SMG960U, 960U1, and 960W and 960SU, and for the S9 Plus they are A3L SMG965U, 965U1, and 965W, and 965SU. The SAR values for these smart phones can be found on the FCC website: https://www.fcc.gov/oet/ea/fccid.

What do the SAR values mean to the consumer?

The legal limit for the SAR in the U.S. is 1.60 w/kg (averaged over one gram of tissue).

The FCC requires that all cell phone models be tested for their Specific Absorption Rate or SAR. The SAR is a measure of the maximum amount of microwave radiation absorbed by the head or the body. It is measured in a laboratory using an artificial model of a large adult male with different fluids to simulate human tissue. The SAR, which is measured in watts per kilogram, represents the maximum amount of energy absorbed in any one gram of tissue in the test model. Phones sold in the U.S. typically range in SAR values from about 0.20 W/kg up to the 1.60 legal limit. (3, 4)

The SAR test, adopted in 1996 by the FCC, was criticized by the U.S. Government Accountability Office in 2012. The test does not reflect those who currently use cell phones, nor does it correspond to the way people use them. Today many children are cell phone users -- the young child’s brain absorbs twice the radiation as the adult’s brain. Moreover, the artificial head does not contain any metal (e.g., dental fillings, earrings, or eyeglass frames) which could increase the radiation absorption beyond the measured SAR in the laboratory. (5)

The FCC assumes that consumers will carry their cell phones in a manufacturer-approved holder that keeps the phone a minimum distance away from the body. However, most people do not keep their phone in a cell phone holder. For the body-worn SAR test, the FCC allows the manufacturer to choose the separation distance between the cell phone and the test model as long as consumers are informed about the minimum distance tested. However, few consumers are aware of the manufacturer’s recommended minimum body separation distance from their cell phone because this information is often difficult to find. Thus, most consumers are in the dark about precautions they can take to keep their exposure to microwave radiation below the legal limit. This prompted the city of Berkeley, California to adopt landmark legislation that requires cellphone retailers to inform their customers about the manufacturer’s safety information.

To ensure that the cell phone does not exceed the legal limit, consumers should never keep their cell phone in their pockets or next to their skin. The cell phone is not tested directly against the body because almost all cell phones would fail the SAR test as the radiation absorption increases dramatically when the cell phone is close to the body.

For a recent news story, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation had the three most popular smart phones tested next to the body. They found that the radiation absorbed increased three to four times, and that the SARs for all three phones exceeded the legal limit (for the U.S. and Canada).

Is the legal limit sufficient to protect the cell phone user’s health?

Federal policies in the U.S. could lead the public to believe that all legally-marketed cell phones are safe, and that a cell phone's SAR doesn't matter as long as it meets the legal limit: 1.6 watts per kilogram. (3, 4)

However, the Environmental Working Group and experts point out that the SAR only measures the maximum microwave absorption from cell phone use that perfectly matches laboratory conditions. The SAR is not a good indicator of one’s cumulative microwave exposure under naturalistic conditions. The research evidence suggests that how one uses the phone (e.g., hands-free) and one’s cell phone carrier actually matters more than the phone’s SAR level. (4, 6, 7)

The SAR standard was developed to protect users only from the acute effects of the heat generated by microwave radiation (i.e., the thermal effect). (5) TheSAR limit does not protect users from the non-thermal effects caused by the cumulative exposure over time to cell phone radiation.

Yet, thousands of laboratory studies with animals and cell samples have found deleterious biologic effects from short-term exposure to low intensity cell phone radiation, including development of stress proteins, micronuclei, free radicals, DNA breakage, and sperm damage. (8) Human studies have also found that brief exposure to cell phone radiation alters brain activity and can open the blood-brain barrier which could enable chemical toxins in the circulatory system to penetrate the brain. (9)

Major studies with humans have found increased cancer risk, including a three-fold increase in brain cancer among those who used wireless phones (cell phones and cordless phones) for 25 or more years. (10) Based upon this research, the World Health Organization in 2011 declared radiofrequency radiation "possibly carcinogenic" in humans (Group 2B). (11)

Based upon the weight of the evidence from several decades of research including thousands of peer-reviewed published studies, many experts worldwide have signed declarations calling upon government to adopt stronger radiation standards to protect consumers from low intensity, non-thermal exposures from radiation associated with wireless communications, and to alert consumers about how to reduce their risk of harm. (14 -16) Recent evidence suggests that brain tumor incidence is increasing in the U.S. and other countries and exposure to cell phone radiation may be contributing to this increase. (17) More than 230 scientists who have published peer-reviewed research on electromagnetic fields and biology or health have signed a petition, the International EMF Scientist Appeal, calling for stronger regulation of wireless radiation.

For tips on how to reduce exposure to wireless radiation, see "Some Tips to Reduce Your Exposure to Wireless Radiation". (18) In short, limit your use of the phone, keep the phone away from your body whenever it is powered on, use the phone hands-free, and turn off transmitters not in use (e.g., shut off Wi-Fi or use airplane mode).

(8) Giuliani L. Soffritti M. Non-thermal effects and mechanisms of interaction between electromagnetic fields and living matter. ICEMS Monograph. Bologna, Italy: National Institute for the Study and Control of Cancer. 2010. http://www.icems.eu/papers.htm